I want to thank everybody and especially Simon for having made this thread so much more interesting than it originally was.
After having seen the first victims stories and pics my initial gut feelings was already not so much in the gut anymore. Now I'm certainly ready to look the other way, but, if you don't mind, I'll keep being the devil's advocate for a moment.
So first, onto google earth, I think this's the spot:
from https://firstname.lastname@example.org,1 ... a=!3m1!1e3
Since initially the train is supposed to have looked like this (in correspondence with the strip of land where the olive groves to the left are side to side with the open field):
We could conclude that perhaps that bit of bend could
appear in a telephoto. And it could
explain the trains not seeing each other.
As to the human activity, there is some. A fire truck, with a couple of firefighters, and several individuals near the train among the olive trees.
I could also argue that the black boxes must be at the front and at the end of the trains
(which is, with the engines), because the composition of carriages changes often, and, if the boxes stayed with them, you would end up with trains with several boxes and trains with none.
As to the impossibility of this event, we are being told that apparently this line lacks automation, thus the stationmasters need to manually call each other on the phone to be informed on train movements. This does sound crazy, I agree, and of course it might as well be a bunch of lies or exaggerations, but this is
the south of Italy where the infrastructure is often backwards and outdated, so I wouldn't rule it out completely.
I've heard local politicians stating in interviews that the accident is a tragic fatality since the line is being upgraded... maybe the pigs in charge of this took advantage of this window to stage an accident where it would still be possible to stage it. While the upcoming upgrade can in the future be defended as "politicians taking action and solving problems". Just speculating here.
For the rest, it seems to me that all observations are pertinent and the clues quite apparent. The rhetoric, the bad scripts, "Real football", the numerology, the striped characters, the convenient opening among the olive groves...
It could be contended that some of these things have been added "after" the facts, although to support this we should have some sort of idea why on earth a real event would be "taken over" by fakery: it seems to me that the symbolism would completely lose its flimsy meaning ("to the initiated: look, we did this!")... Although, we have in the past speculated on the probable tendency of the pigs on charge to take over reality and give it the same makeup they give to fakery
, so that the public would slowly lose the ability to tell which is which
. There's that too. But I'm not saying we are seeing this at work here.
To conclude, for now, I can only agree with Simon that the "weeping relative" we are being given is quite unbelievable. Why does she forget her sister and talks about "her father", only to correct herself a moment later? Why does she talks about "the powers that be"? This is not a mafia crime, this is not the Ustica crash... I must say it is especially hard to accept this as nothing but a bad actor improvising on a bad script. smiling as the sister (I assume they're sisters) describes to the press her dead father as "mad and joyous"